Talk:Astrid and Hiccup's Relationship
Added Discussion topic Astrid and Hiccup Relationship Page I disagree with the deletion of the Astrid and Hiccup's Relationship page. For major relationships like Astrid and Hiccup's relationship a separate page is the most concise, accurate, and organized way to handle such a thing. Take a look at the main pages. The relationship information is pretty much duplicated on both pages, and if anyone wants to add, delete, or edit any information on their relationship it has to be done to both pages. This is simply a source of possible confusion and contradiction. Not to mention a waste of time and space. Having a single relationship page also allows for better coverage of the relationship since it will allow for a much more in-depth coverage of the relationship. Which, would be cumbersome and cluttering on the main page. This was how Kim and Ron's relationship was handled not the Kim Possible Wiki page and it worked very well. I think that the page needs to be fleshed out and then linked into the main pages for Astrid and Hiccup. Mknopp (talk) 02:33, August 1, 2015 (UTC) Other common wikis do not have such a page. All this info should be put on both pages. If this is not eniough, the exact same info is to be copied on both pages. This page seems very random and "unprofessional". That is only one wiki, all others just put the relationship on the main pages. Lightning the Skrill (talk) 02:45, August 1, 2015 (UTC) :I can't speak for all wikis. But I do know that when the relationship is a major part of the series, I have seen it done. The relationship between Astrid and Hiccup is more of a major part of the series than the majority of the pages that are on this wiki. As for the "professional" state of the page, it isn't even close to done. It is a work in progress. Which is why I haven't replaced the info on the main pages. :As for how many other wikis do it, well if the relationship is a major part of the story then they are doing it wrong as well. Data normalization is the "professional" thing to do. Having redundant sets of information is not a good thing. :Mknopp (talk) 02:54, August 1, 2015 (UTC) Having the page there is unprofessional. And, Astrid's and Hiccup's relationship is not as close as Hiccup's and Toothless'. And you can't just say that "wikis are doing it wrong if there is a strong relationship". Why was there never a HiccupToothless page? Cause it is NOT needed, and completely unnecessary. Lightning the Skrill (talk) 02:58, August 1, 2015 (UTC) :And I disagree. You seem to be hung up on the topic of the page. The topic is irrelevant to the decision of normalizing the data. The only reason that the relationships meet this criteria is that it is a shared piece of data between two other data sources. :Maybe there should be a Hiccup and Toothless Relationship page if the amount of shared information is sufficient enough and redundant enough to warrant it. I haven't even looked at the Toothless page to know. This isn't simply opinion. It is a part of database/data management. There are several levels of normalization, and the relationship data meets enough of the criteria to warrant a separate joined data source. So, yeah, if the other wikis have a large amount of redundant data in two separate data stores, then they are doing it wrong. :The only thing that you have to decide is whether you want to follow their wrong example or manage this wiki better. :That is all that I am going to say on it. Other than, I would appreciate it if you might let other people actually weigh in on this. To quote the Best Practices for Administrators Page, "admins don't make the rules and don't make unilateral decisions, but rather they use their tools to carry out the will of the community." It is kind of hard to carry out the will of the community if you don't stop to listen to the community. :Mknopp (talk) 03:12, August 1, 2015 (UTC) It is just that you are the admin of your wiki, and you want to put it your way. And whatever your wiki does that other wikis don't, you call wrong. Then you want to put it your way on other wikis. It is not a wrong example, it makes the wiki easy to follow, for other people. And some wikis want to do so, and some wikis don't. You should try to go on other wikis that practice the way we do and try to convince them. Lightning the Skrill (talk) 03:19, August 1, 2015 (UTC) I just want to mention that I believe this page is needed. Like Mknopp said it allows more to be said about Astrid and Hiccup's relationship. A relationship page is beneficial as it allows for a more complete description of a relationship, especially one that has enough information that a page would make sense. There is only so much that can fit in each of the character's individual pages in the relationship section before it gets to the point where it is too lengthy. Hiccup's page is already very long so moving the info about his relationship with Astrid to a relationship page would entirely make sense. I also want to add that on one of the wiki's I edit, where I am actually one of the administrators, they have relationship pages for all the major relationships in the show. Having seen those pages I know how beneficial a relationship page can be. http://phineasandferb.wikia.com/wiki/Isabella_and_Phineas's_relationship here is an example of a relationship page from that wiki, and http://phineasandferb.wikia.com/wiki/Candace_and_Jeremy's_relationship here is another example]] from that same wiki. These two examples are good examples of what a relationship page can be and how beneficial it can be to a wiki. So I would have to say that this page is needed and that a Hiccup and Toothless relationship page is needed as well. P&F fan92 (talk) 03:52, August 1, 2015 (UTC) I don't see how it "allows" more to be said. The main pages can be said infinite times. And still, it causes trouble fore new people or people who read the wiki to follow along. Lightning the Skrill (talk) 03:58, August 1, 2015 (UTC) :Just to be clear, it isn't "your" or "my" wiki. An admin doesn't own a wiki. And the relationship page on the Kim Possible wiki wasn't even my doing. It was created before I ever edited the wiki. I have simply seen the benefit of normalizing that data. And yes, I want to make this wiki better by normalizing this data and reducing redundancy and upkeep effort. :Making a separate page for the relationship allows for more to be said because placing all of the images and explanations on the main character page would vastly increase the size of the page. One of the best practices that wikia was pushing back when they were moving to mobile was to try and keep page size down. Even without mobile this is a good practice. Why would I care to download thirty to sixty images and thousands of words of text regarding the relationship between Astrid and Hiccup if all I care about is what Astrid's favorite weapon is, or what her relationship is with Stoick. Making the relationship into its own page allows for one or two screencaps per episode and a paragraph or more per episode without bloating the main character page. :Mknopp (talk) 17:28, August 1, 2015 (UTC) According to one of our admins, he and another admin already discussed about this. In the past there was a Hiccstrid page, and the admins already made up to it and it was deleted. Mknopp go see User talk:Toothless the Nightfury:Is this page actually necessary? section. See what I am talking about. Lightning the Skrill (talk) 02:00, August 5, 2015 (UTC) :I find it extremely concerning that there is an apparent attitude that the admins are the owners and arbiters of the wiki and that is not the wikia way of doing things. At this point I am seeing three people who want it, and four that don't, and no effort at all by you to try and get some community feedback. :To quote the wikia Best Practices for Administrators, "Admins should always be thought of not as bosses or rulers, but as guides who are no more or less important or influential than any other user on the wikia. All users on wikias should be equal, even those who have a few extra editing tools. After all, if admins were the only important people on the wikia, then there would be no need for users." And yet, instead of even attempting to take this to community and allowing for a sufficient amount of time to discuss it, you seem to simply want to discuss it with the other admins and make a ruling. That is not the wikia way. :That being said, I don't care enough to continue pushing for it. Do what you want. I will copy the information to my hard drive and as I find more research for my story I will simply keep it to myself. As it seems more than apparent that the admins for this wiki don't want it to be a comprehensive source of information on the franchise, but instead simply want it to be another wikipedia with a generalized and shallow coverage. :I have saved the page source code, so go ahead and delete it. :Mknopp (talk) 02:59, August 6, 2015 (UTC) :I'm with Mknopp 100% if there is a lot to say about a relationship it should have it's own page. :Blu100-Jewel100 (talk) Canon Sources Canon Sources Just out of curiosity, what is the official take on sources of canon on this wiki? This is something that greatly varies from wiki to wiki. For instance, some wikis consider the "word of god" (comments made by creators and actors) to be canon as long as they do not contradict anything shown in the material. Some wikis only consider material from official media to be canon. I am asking because, apparently, there is an interview somewhere in which America and Jay said that they believe and act like Astrid and Hiccup have engaged in sexual intercourse. There is nothing in the series to contradict this. I don't know where the interview is, or if it even really exists, but if it does, would this be considered canon on this wiki? Thanks, Mknopp (talk) 22:41, August 10, 2015 (UTC) Season 4 I think their big secret is... they're engaged?! *GASP* What if we actually see Hiccup propose to Astrid???!!! *prepares to faint* O.o ~ Heathstrid "Two axes are better than one!" 05:39, May 29, 2016 (UTC) :That would be awesome!--Annabeth and Percy~The present is our future past, we've gotta make this moment last right now. 16:54, May 29, 2016 (UTC) This page's existence? Why is there a completely separate page devoted to this?---Lavamelon (talk) 23:11, November 7, 2016 (UTC)lavamelon